Huh? Looks like they are supporting every build system alive https://github.com/openframeworks/openFrameworks/tree/patch-release/libs/openFrameworksCompiled/project
> 30 окт. 2018 г., в 22:14, Jean-Michaël Celerier > <jeanmichael.celer...@gmail.com> написал(а): > > OpenFrameworks, a fairly used creative coding framework has been using QBS > for a few years. My experience with it in that context has been quite > negative - a year ago it would break on every new QBS release, so you had to > use an exact QBS version if you wanted to use OFX (exhibit A: > https://forum.openframeworks.cc/t/qtcreator-v4-3-1-qbs-problem/27214 > <https://forum.openframeworks.cc/t/qtcreator-v4-3-1-qbs-problem/27214>), so > multiple people I know have ended up porting OF to use CMake instead : > https://github.com/ofnode/of <https://github.com/ofnode/of> which frankly > worked better and with less breakage. As always, mileage may vary. > > > ------- > Jean-Michaël Celerier > http://www.jcelerier.name <http://www.jcelerier.name/> > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 10:07 PM Thiago Macieira <thiago.macie...@intel.com > <mailto:thiago.macie...@intel.com>> wrote: > On Tuesday, 30 October 2018 13:47:00 PDT Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 12:53:48PM -0700, Thiago Macieira wrote: > > > On Tuesday, 30 October 2018 12:29:46 PDT Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > > > > doesn't authorize you to impose requirements that make it basically > > > > impossible to employ qt as a bootstrapping device for a qbs > > > > ecosystem. > > > > > > The whole point was "let Qt not be the guinea pig". > > > > you're essentially presuming that qbs is developed by a potentially > > incompetent external entity. > > No. However, I am asking for proof. > > > > Show me that the tool can achieve what Qt needs for it to achieve > > > > qtbase//wip/qbs2 speaks for itself. > > That's the guinea pig. I am asking for proof by seeing someone else adopt it. > The tool is now several years old, it ought to have attracted *someone*. > > And even if it hasn't, there are a couple of years left until we switch for > Qt. The community supporting this tool can find other projects of moderate > complexity to work with and support. > > > > and has enough of a track record of a community to ask for help. > > > > it has enough "community" and intrinsic quality to get things going. > > I'm not disputing it has quality. But it lacks a specific community I called > for: packagers. > > Tell me, has anyone tried to build that branch in the Boot2Qt context? > > > asking for more is completely unreasonable before the community from > > which the tool originates shows committment by *relying* on it. and as > > the current situation shows, everyone who didn't trust the story was > > *right*. > > I disagree and I find it completely reasonable to ask. That's why I did so. > > And yes, they were right: if qbs is created for Qt alone, then they shouldn't > rely on it. Hence the request to show that it can be used by others and that > there's at least a modest community behind it. > > There has been enough time to get more adoption and there's still time left. > So get someone else to adopt it. > > -- > Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com <http://intel.com/> > Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center > > > > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org <mailto:Development@qt-project.org> > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development > <http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development> > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
